ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[drbrumley]

I take exception to that. Why do you who clame to know god demean him so? I think you and your elk cannot conceive of god outside your human logic. You seem to be doing your best to bring God down to your terms. It really saddens my heart to see you do this.

this post makes me

How do we bring God down to our terms? Your the one who has to have a God who knows all before time ever existed. Like it is some sort of neccessaty. Like if He doesnt know all, even the unknowable, he ceases to be God. Sad.

 

[Bob Hill]

It is sad. What he needs is biblical support, but there is too much biblical material against that position.

Bob Hill

 

[Delmar]

this post makes me

How do we bring God down to our terms? Your the one who has to have a God who knows all before time ever existed. Like it is some sort of neccessaty. Like if He doesnt know all, even the unknowable, he ceases to be God. Sad.

That is the exact claim that Mustard Seed made here

 

[drbrumley]

That is the exact claim that Mustard Seed made here

So? Are you claiming I profess Mormon doctrine?

 

[Delmar]

So? Are you claiming I profess Mormon doctrine?

I'm sorry, no ! I was saying that E4E and Mustard Seed were both making the claim that God is not able to be God if he does not pre determine every little detail of the future! The essence of such a statement is to assert man's authority over what God needs to do!

 

[bling]

Originally Posted by Clete
As for what causes X to happen and not Y, who knows and who cares. There are probably hundreds of possible answers but the only answer that answer that has any relevance to this issue is that X is caused by something other my own volition.

Clete, I appreciate your response and I really can understand why you are so fanatical about time not being a variable. If I could or did believe the way you do, I would have to draw the same conclusion.

The above comment you made about X and Y is an example of one of the problems I have with your support to your conclusion. I continue to see B as the cause of X being done instead of Y in my scenario, and although you say there are hundreds of options I can not find but the one, since God is avoiding the information by His own desire. Since you do not think it is B and have hundreds of options can you give one besides God that is likely?

Clete, I think you would say with your stance on time that you would be constricted in you scientific investigation. Which is fine Clete, since I would not look to you for the science to support your ideas or refute my ideas. There is a lot of science supporting the relativity of time and problems with God being subject to time and ever getting around to starting the universe or being able to get around in such a vast area or being able to have time to process all the information available and do anything with it. Do you have scientific web sites that support this idea (I have a master’s in Chemistry) and like this stuff?

I will limit our discussions to differences we have that do not require foreknowledge, since that is not an option with you. Do you find man’s objective being stated in scripture?

 

[Mustard Seed]

I'm sorry, no ! I was saying that E4E and Mustard Seed were both making the claim that God is not able to be God if he does not pre determine every little detail of the future! The essence of such a statement is to assert man's authority over what God needs to do!

That is NOT my belief. That is an erroneous extrapolation that formulates a false dichotomy, one I do not hold to be valid.

God's foreknowledge does NOT infringe upon our agency. Those who believe such are clinging to a false, finite and wrong set of assumptions upon which they bind their view of God to. Such belief is leaning upon the arm of flesh, it is demanding that God, and his relationship to all things, is bound to the erroneous and finite logical paradigms of mortal fallable humans.

 

[godrulz]

I'm sorry, no ! I was saying that E4E and Mustard Seed were both making the claim that God is not able to be God if he does not pre determine every little detail of the future! The essence of such a statement is to assert man's authority over what God needs to do!

God sovereignly chose to give us significant freedom rather than creating a deterministic universe.

John Sanders, in "The God who Risks" (p. 222):

"The biblical model of God as a personal being who enters into genuinely reciprocal relations with us fits nicely with human libertarian freedom (vs compatibilism - rulz). God is not being reduced- unless one has in mind some particular model of deity that cannot in any way be contingent on the actions of creatures (i.e. Platonic influence on Augustine, etc. - rulz). If God actually does respond, change His mind and dialogue with His creatures, then the model here explained is NOT a reduction of God but an affirmation of how God really operates in relation to us".

(context of incompatibilism vs compatibilism)

 

[godrulz]

That is NOT my belief. That is an erroneous extrapolation that formulates a false dichotomy, one I do not hold to be valid.

God's foreknowledge does NOT infringe upon our agency. Those who believe such are clinging to a false, finite and wrong set of assumptions upon which they bind their view of God to. Such belief is leaning upon the arm of flesh, it is demanding that God, and his relationship to all things, is bound to the erroneous and finite logical paradigms of mortal fallable humans.

In LDS thought, does God foreknow exhaustively every detail of the future, including free will choices? Perhaps you could look in "Mormon Doctrine" under omniscience or foreknowledge to see what the official stance is. I would be surprised if it is the same as Calvinism. Even JWs lean more to Open Theism on this subject (omniscience).

The issue is the nature of the future, not whether God is omniscient of not (i.e. does He know the non-existent future as actual/certain, or only as possible until it becomes actual).

 

[RobE]

We must remember that there are some things that God has predestined. They will happen unless God changes His mind and tells us. Prayer could be one of the reasons that He would change His mind.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

Well said. I agree completely. In order to predestine you must foreknow somehow or bring it about. Was Judas predestined by foresight or did our Lord bring about Judas' fate?

From Augustine's Confessions, pp 78,79:

For who is Lord but the Lord? or who is God save our God? ... Thou lovest, and burnest not; art jealous, yet free from care; repentest, and hast no sorrow; art angry, yet serene; changest Thy ways, leaving unchanged Thy plans; recoverest what Thou findest, having yet never lost; art never in want, whilst Thou rejoicest in gain; never covetous, though requiring usury ... [Emphases added]

From the Letters of Augustine, pp. 949, 950

... this Word of God, I say, took to Himself, in a manner entirely different from that in which He is present to other creatures, the soul and body of a man, and made, by the union of Himself therewith, the one person Jesus Christ, Mediator between God and men, His Deity equal with the Father, in His flesh, i.e. in His human nature, inferior to the Father, unchangeably immortal in respect of the divine nature, in which He is equal with the Father, and yet changeable and mortal in respect of the infirmity which was His through participation with our nature. [Emphases added]

Yet His plans don't change---just his method. Let's look at Tyre.....

Siege of Tyre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In 332 BC, Alexander the Great set out to conquer Tyre, a strategic coastal base in the war between the Greeks and the Persians. Unable to storm the city, he blockaded Tyre for seven months, but Tyre held on. Alexander used the debris of the abandoned mainland city to build a causeway and once within reach of the city walls, he used his siege engines to batter and finally breach the fortifications. It is said that Alexander was so enraged at the Tyrians' defense and the loss of his men that he destroyed half the city. The town's 30,000 residents were massacred or sold into slavery.

Originally Posted by Ezekiel 26


2 “Son of man, because Tyre has said against Jerusalem, ‘Aha! She is broken who was the gateway of the peoples; now she is turned over to me; I shall be filled; she is laid waste.’

7 “For thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Behold, I will bring against Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar[a] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses, with chariots, and with horsemen, and an army with many people. 8 He will slay with the sword your daughter villages in the fields; he will heap up a siege mound against you, build a wall against you, and raise a defense against you.

Wikipedia

Alexander used the debris of the abandoned mainland city to build a causeway and once within reach of the city walls, he used his siege engines to batter and finally breach the fortifications.

God changed His methods not His plans. Why?

Originally Posted by Jeremiah 27:11

11 But if any nation will bow its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him, I will let that nation remain in its own land to till it and to live there, declares the LORD.

So, my point is that God must foreknow an outcome or bring an outcome about by His plans. Maybe both. But it simply won't do for God not to know the future because that would be like someone in charge of a runaway train. No one believes this. Open Theism MUST believe this in order for it to be a 'new' idea. Otherwise Open Theism just takes from Augustine, who took from the 'evil' Plato. Foretelling, foresight, which are methods to foreknowledge are not foreordination or coercion.

Thanks for all your wonderful comments and Merry Christmas,

Rob Mauldin

 

[godrulz]

Well said. I agree completely. In order to predestine you must foreknow somehow or bring it about. Was Judas predestined by foresight or did our Lord bring about Judas' fate?



Yet His plans don't change---just his method. Let's look at Tyre.....



God changed His methods not His plans. Why?



So, my point is that God must foreknow an outcome or bring an outcome about by His plans. Maybe both. But it simply won't do for God not to know the future because that would be like someone in charge of a runaway train. No one believes this. Open Theism MUST believe this in order for it to be a 'new' idea. Otherwise Open Theism just takes from Augustine, who took from the 'evil' Plato. Foretelling, foresight, which are methods to foreknowledge are not foreordination or coercion.

Thanks for all your wonderful comments and Merry Christmas,

Rob Mauldin

God is omnicompetent and is able to govern history providentially. Foreknowledge, determinism, meticulous control are not necessary for an all-wise, all-powerful, all-resourceful God.

Judas sunk his own ship. God did not have to foreknow it from eternity past nor did he have to cause it. If Judas did not betray Him, someone else could have. The exact wording of NT writings, inspired by the Spirit, could have been different if Judas had remained true to his calling. They were written after the fact and could have talked about Joe Blow betraying Christ. Judas was not named in the OT.

Foreknowledge could be explained by Calvinism (determinism...somewhat logical, but at the expense of genuine freedom) or by the simple foreknowledge of Arminianism (this is assumed without a cogent explanation...how can God know a nothing? The future is not there yet to 'see'. If it was knowable as a certainty, then alternative choice is negated. The future is fatalisitically fixed).

Summary:

1. Did God from all eternity decree whatever will come to pass?

Yes= Calvinism (no contingencies, no uncertainties).

No= Arminian
alternative (Open Theism) (contingencies)

2. Is everything certain in God's mind from all eternity?

Yes= Calvin (decree= certain)
Arminian (foreknew= certain)

No= Open Theism (some of the future is unsettled/uncertain, while some of the future is determined and brought about by God).

God is resourceful, creative, omnicompetent. The issue is the nature of the future, not whether God is in control (there are various ways one can be in control) or whether He is omnsicient (He is...He knows all that is knowable...exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies is simply illogical).

 

[Mustard Seed]

In LDS thought, does God foreknow exhaustively every detail of the future, including free will choices?

My view, and I have a hard time seeing how it could be otherwise, is that we both have freewill AND that God has exhaustive forknowledge of every future detail. I believe that the idea that there is conflict on this is simply conjecture based on a faulty view of the nature of either time and/or God.

Perhaps you could look in "Mormon Doctrine" under omniscience or foreknowledge to see what the official stance is.

That particular book is not authoritative 'official stance'.

 

[RobE]

Reply to Godrulz

Reply to Godrulz

Weather forecasters routinely 'predict' the weather, but are not always 100% right. The dictionary definition is not as narrow as yours.

You're right. The form of prediction that Open Theism talks about is forecasting(with probabilities).

My question to you is simple:

If God was a weather forecaster, and He said it was going to rain, would you expect rain?

I say that God can forecast what you will do with equal accuracy.

Your Friend,

Rob

 

[Delmar]

You're right. The form of prediction that Open Theism talks about is forecasting(with probabilities).

My question to you is simple:

If God was a weather forecaster, and He said it was going to rain, would you expect rain?

I say that God can forecast what you will do with equal accuracy.

Your Friend,

Rob

The weather does not make decisions.

 

[Clete]

RobE and bling,

Although it probably isn't entirely necessary to do so, I intend to start a new thread on this issue of Divine Foreknowledge and Free Will. The reason I want to start a new thread is that I think that it will serve to refocus the discussion. Based on his last response to me, RobE seems to have completely lost sight of what my argument even is and bling is coming just shy of engaging the core of the argument. And so I think I can kill two birds with one stone by presenting my argument against divine foreknowledge in a more formal syllogistic manner with the intent of boiling my argument down to it's most basic premises and conclusions.

I'll post a link in this thread when I have posted the new thread.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[godrulz]

My view, and I have a hard time seeing how it could be otherwise, is that we both have freewill AND that God has exhaustive forknowledge of every future detail. I believe that the idea that there is conflict on this is simply conjecture based on a faulty view of the nature of either time and/or God.



That particular book is not authoritative 'official stance'.

I understand, but it is probably more helpful than one Mormon's opinion.

There is a logical contradiction or absurdity with the idea that God can have exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies. This is a topic on many threads in this particular forum (Open Theism).

What is the official LDS view on the nature of eternity. I disagree that matter is eternal. Only the uncreated Creator is eternal.

Is God timeless, existing in an 'eternal now' simultaneity? (common Christian view from Augustine who was influenced by Platonic ideas).

Is God from everlasting to everlasting (apart from the issues of your evolving man to god) experiencing an endless duration of time (sequence/succession)? This is a more common view in Open Theism, but is considered heretical by many Christian scholars. I believe it is the most cogent and biblical view (A vs B theory of time in philosophical journals). The past is fixed, the present is now, and the future is not yet.

 

[godrulz]

You're right. The form of prediction that Open Theism talks about is forecasting(with probabilities).

My question to you is simple:

If God was a weather forecaster, and He said it was going to rain, would you expect rain?

I say that God can forecast what you will do with equal accuracy.

Your Friend,

Rob

Weather operates on cause and effect. He knows all the factors to make a weather prediction (even meteorologists can do this fairly good). He could also make it rain to fulfill His prediction. This does not mean He knew the exact weather for every minute in every location on earth from trillions of years ago (even man's existence has contributed to weather changes).

How can God know exactly what I will typejgv09as rjy'på?’¥¢ojni;pboieoijeoigvdevbndfboivb ;onfdkjlfdjoimdfokjn before I existed orirahgpuehgphgph?pgihnaeugbh or from eternity past. I am a very good typer and speller. It was sheer impulse and use of random, spastic keystrokesghiuehgpi?gpihgh to predict this. Unless the future is actually the past and God saw me doing this in advance, how could He knowghj9pehg[aJgbo9hjn?????/


It was my creative free will and random motor skills that messed this post up. What possible object of knowledge is there in reality that would make God know this junk from trillions of years ago? Would it threaten His sovereignty if He did not know I was going to be a goof a minute ago?

If you vote for determinism, how can you say I was free to do this or otherwise if there was something causal back of the will to make me do it (negating genuine freedom)?

If you say it is simple foreknowledge, explain what this means and its mechanism. How can God 'see' something that is not there yet. To know a nothing is a bald contradiction and not a deficiency in omniscience.

How can God know every detail of next year's Superbowl from trillions of years ago if the coaches and players are free to do millions of unpredictable things. There is a difference between possible, probable, actual/certain, necessary. Do not blur this distinction unless you can logically disprove the science of modal logic and quantum mechanics.

 

[Mustard Seed]

I understand, but it is probably more helpful than one Mormon's opinion.

There is a logical contradiction or absurdity with the idea that God can have exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies. This is a topic on many threads in this particular forum (Open Theism).

It's only a logical contradictions within the confines of finite human logic. There are also logical contradictions in the same finite human paradigm that render the trinity as you see it absurd and contradictory.

 

[godrulz]

It's only a logical contradictions within the confines of finite human logic. There are also logical contradictions in the same finite human paradigm that render the trinity as you see it absurd and contradictory.

The Trinity is a revelation in Scripture. We would not intuitively assume God is triune unless He revealed Himself as such. Likewise we would not know if there was one God or many gods unless He revealed His nature and character.

The issues surrounding free will and foreknowledge are biblical, logical, and philosophical. Even with secular philosophy, apart from belief in God (cf. mathematics), it can be demonstrated that foreknowledge is incompatible with free will. This is a huge debate in academic circles. I suspect you are not conversant enough with it to understand why many thinkers see it as an actual vs apparent problem.

God correctly knows the future as possible, not certain/actual, until it becomes actual in real space-time history. God has a history. This shows that He is not timeless and that the future is partially open and unsettled at this moment in time/history. This is how God reveals His experiences in revelation (Hebraic view). The other view is a Greek, Platonic concept of an absolutely changeless, perfect Being. The problem is that this logically makes God impersonal, not personal, since will (actions), intellect (thoughts), and emotions (feelings), require change, time, sequence, duration (not so-called incoherent timelessness).

 

[RobE]

Weather operates on cause and effect. He knows all the factors to make a weather prediction (even meteorologists can do this fairly good). He could also make it rain to fulfill His prediction. This does not mean He knew the exact weather for every minute in every location on earth from trillions of years ago (even man's existence has contributed to weather changes).

Are you saying that human beings don't operate on the principle of cause and effect? How did you come to know the Lord? Did you wake up one morning and say, 'I believe in Jesus'? Do you know anyone who was saved like this?

How can God know exactly what I will typejgv09as rjy'på?’¥¢ojni;pboieoijeoigvdevbndfboivb ;onfdkjlfdjoimdfokjn before I existed orirahgpuehgphgph?pgihnaeugbh or from eternity past. I am a very good typer and speller. It was sheer impulse and use of random, spastic keystrokesghiuehgpi?gpihgh to predict this. Unless the future is actually the past and God saw me doing this in advance, how could He knowghj9pehg[aJgbo9hjn?????/

Laplace strongly believed in causal determinism, which is expressed in the following quote from the introduction to the Essai:

"We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes."

It was my creative free will and random motor skills that messed this post up. What possible object of knowledge is there in reality that would make God know this junk from trillions of years ago? Would it threaten His sovereignty if He did not know I was going to be a goof a minute ago?

Determinism in Western tradition

The idea that the entire universe is a deterministic system has been articulated in both Western and non-Western religion, philosophy, and literature. The Ancient Greek atomists Leucippus and Democritus were the first to anticipate determinism when they theorized that all processes in the world were due to the mechanical interplay of atoms, but this theory did not gain much support at the time. Determinism in the West is often associated with Newtonian physics, which depicts the physical matter of the universe as operating according to a set of fixed, knowable laws. The "billiard ball" hypothesis, a product of Newtonian physics, argues that once the initial conditions of the universe have been established the rest of the history of the universe follows inevitably. If it were actually possible to have complete knowledge of physical matter and all of the laws governing that matter at any one time, then it would be theoretically possible to compute the time and place of every event that will ever occur (Laplace's demon). In this sense, the basic particles of the universe operate in the same fashion as the rolling balls on a billiard table, moving and striking each other in predictable ways to produce predictable results.

If you vote for determinism, how can you say I was free to do this or otherwise if there was something causal back of the will to make me do it (negating genuine freedom)?

Just because God is a master psychologist(physicist) and understands human behavior(creation) completely doesn't take your 'free' will away. Your actions can only result in a certain set of outcomes, right? What makes you think God can't figure those outcomes out?

If you say it is simple foreknowledge, explain what this means and its mechanism. How can God 'see' something that is not there yet. To know a nothing is a bald contradiction and not a deficiency in omniscience.

To be in place A and place B at once is a bald contradiction; yet you accept God is capable of this. He's more capable than you think. If you believe He's omnicapable, as you have stated, then you believe that He is the being that Laplace talked about(see above).

How can God know every detail of next year's Superbowl from trillions of years ago if the coaches and players are free to do millions of unpredictable things. There is a difference between possible, probable, actual/certain, necessary. Do not blur this distinction unless you can logically disprove the science of modal logic and quantum mechanics.

I agree there are some things God may not want to know, but that doesn't mean He's incapable of knowing it. You see, Clete and Bob Hill, in this thread state that God can 'figure' out what Judas will do. How is that? It's because as you stated He's capable to the point of appearing to foresee what happens. Now you say 'how can God know' what I will do? Do you understand how He can know? He's smarter than Open Theism gives Him credit for. Do you think He might be able to figure out the SuperBowl winner if He could figure Judas out? Or is that too hard for Him?

God loves us and He understands us. I believe both with certainty. I know you do as well.

Friends,
Rob

p.s. Is there anywhere I can store some of the quotes that I seem to have to use again, and again, and again. I spend most of my time looking them up again. Thanks in advance.